Income inequality in the United State remained relatively stable for a period of nearly forty years. Beginning in the 1970’s, however, this period of stability ended, as the first signs of widening income inequality became apparent. Over the course of the 1970’s and 1980’s , an increasingly clear trend toward greater income inequality emerged. By the end of the 1980’s, the top 20 percent of workers were receiving the largest share of income ever recorded by government figures, and the bottom three fifths were receiving the lowest shares ever recorded. This trend has continued into the 1990’s and currently shows no signs of decline. When the indicators of growing inequality were first observed in the 1970’s, some researchers argued that the effects were merely temporary artifacts of short-term labor market disturbances. The new occupational structure appears to be one with an increase of well-paid technical, scientific and professional jobs at the top, a sliding middle class, and a growing poorly-paid service and retail jobs at the bottom. Several important labor-force changes appeared to be contributing to the shifting occupational structure.
As occupational reconstructing and growing income inequality have become increasingly evident, a heated debate as to the causes and magnitude of these changes arose. Two dominant bodies of thought emerged around the issue: the job-skill mismatch thesis and the polarization thesis. Mismatch theorists argue that there is an increasing distance between the high skill requirements of post-industrial jobs and the inadequate training and mediocre qualifications of workers. They see the post-industrial economy leaving behind unskilled workers, especially women and minorities. For the mismatch theorist, the trend toward greater inequality is temporary arid will dissipate once the supply of workers acquires the skills demanded by a post-industrial economy. And they predict that the workers will experience an upgrading in their wages over the long run. Polarization theorists, on the other hand, believe that the rise in inequality is permanent, a result of the shift to a service-based economy. This vision of the postindustrial economy is characteristically polarized. The problem according to these theorists, is the type of jobs being generated in the new economy, not worker attributes. Because they believe the causes are structural and permanent, polarization theorists would deny the efficacy of public policies designed to educate and train unskilled workers. They predict a long-term continuation of the trend towards increasing income inequality.
Studies show that the long-run increase in income inequality is also related to changes in the Nation’s labor market and its household composition. The wage distribution has become considerably more unequal with more highly skilled, trained and educated workers at the top experiencing real wage gains and those at the bottom real wage losses. One factor is the shift in employment from those goods-producing industries that have disproportionately provided high-wage opportunities for low-skilled workers, towards services that disproportionately employ college graduates, and towards low-wage sectors such as retail trade. But within industry, shifts in labor demand away from less-educated workers are perhaps a more important explanation of eroding wages than the shift out of manufacturing.
Also cited as putting downward pressure on the wages of less-educated workers are intensifying global competition and immigration, the decline of the proportion of workers belonging to unions, the decline in the real value of the minimum wage, the increasing need for computer skills, and the increasing use of temporary workers.
From the Paragraph 1, we can see that beginning in the 1970s______.

A:income became more unequal B:income became more equal C:income became more unstable D:income became more stable

Our ape-men forefathers had no obvious natural weapons in the struggle for (1) in the open. They had neither the powerful teeth nor the strong claws of the big cats. They could not (2) with the bear, whose strength, speed and claws (3) an impressive " small fire" weaponry. They could not even defend themselves (4) running swiftly like the horses, zebras or small animals. If the ape-men had attempted to compete on those terms in the open, they would have been (5) to failure and extinction. But they were (6) with enormous concealed advantages of a kind not possessed by any of their competitors.
In the search (7) the pickings of the forest, the ape-men had (8) efficient stereoscopic vision and a sense of color that the animals of the grasslands did not (9) . The ability to see clearly at close range permitted the ape-men to study practical problems in a way that lay far (10) the reach of the original inhabitants of the grassland. Good long-distance sight was (11) another matter. Lack of long-distance vision had not been a problem for forest-dwelling apes and monkeys because the (12) the viewpoint, the greater the range of sight-so (13) they had had to do was climb a tree. Out in the open, however, this simple solution was not (14) . Climbing a hill would have helped, but in many places the ground was flat. The ape-men (15) the only possible solution. They reared up as high as possible on their hind limbs and began to walk (16) . This vital change of physical position brought about considerable disadvantages. It was extremely unstable and it meant that the already slow ape-men became (17) still. (18) , they persevered and their bone structure gradually became (19) to the new, unstable position that (20) them the name Homo erectus, upright man.

3（）

A:became B:equipped C:posed D:provided

Directions:
Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank.

A:became B:equipped C:posed D:provided

Income inequality in the United State remained relatively stable for a period of nearly forty years. Beginning in the 1970’s, however, this period of stability ended, as the first signs of widening income inequality became apparent. Over the course of the 1970’s and 1980’s , an increasingly clear trend toward greater income inequality emerged. By the end of the 1980’s, the top 20 percent of workers were receiving the largest share of income ever recorded by government figures, and the bottom three fifths were receiving the lowest shares ever recorded. This trend has continued into the 1990’s and currently shows no signs of decline. When the indicators of growing inequality were first observed in the 1970’s, some researchers argued that the effects were merely temporary artifacts of short-term labor market disturbances. The new occupational structure appears to be one with an increase of well-paid technical, scientific and professional jobs at the top, a sliding middle class, and a growing poorly-paid service and retail jobs at the bottom. Several important labor-force changes appeared to be contributing to the shifting occupational structure.
As occupational reconstructing and growing income inequality have become increasingly evident, a heated debate as to the causes and magnitude of these changes arose. Two dominant bodies of thought emerged around the issue: the job-skill mismatch thesis and the polarization thesis. Mismatch theorists argue that there is an increasing distance between the high skill requirements of post-industrial jobs and the inadequate training and mediocre qualifications of workers. They see the post-industrial economy leaving behind unskilled workers, especially women and minorities. For the mismatch theorist, the trend toward greater inequality is temporary arid will dissipate once the supply of workers acquires the skills demanded by a post-industrial economy. And they predict that the workers will experience an upgrading in their wages over the long run. Polarization theorists, on the other hand, believe that the rise in inequality is permanent, a result of the shift to a service-based economy. This vision of the postindustrial economy is characteristically polarized. The problem according to these theorists, is the type of jobs being generated in the new economy, not worker attributes. Because they believe the causes are structural and permanent, polarization theorists would deny the efficacy of public policies designed to educate and train unskilled workers. They predict a long-term continuation of the trend towards increasing income inequality.
Studies show that the long-run increase in income inequality is also related to changes in the Nation’s labor market and its household composition. The wage distribution has become considerably more unequal with more highly skilled, trained and educated workers at the top experiencing real wage gains and those at the bottom real wage losses. One factor is the shift in employment from those goods-producing industries that have disproportionately provided high-wage opportunities for low-skilled workers, towards services that disproportionately employ college graduates, and towards low-wage sectors such as retail trade. But within industry, shifts in labor demand away from less-educated workers are perhaps a more important explanation of eroding wages than the shift out of manufacturing.
Also cited as putting downward pressure on the wages of less-educated workers are intensifying global competition and immigration, the decline of the proportion of workers belonging to unions, the decline in the real value of the minimum wage, the increasing need for computer skills, and the increasing use of temporary workers.

From the Paragraph 1, we can see that beginning in the 1970s（）

A:income became more unequal B:income became more equal C:income became more unstable D:income became more stable

Income inequality in the United State remained relatively stable for a period of nearly forty years. Beginning in the 1970’s, however, this period of stability ended, as the first signs of widening income inequality became apparent. Over the course of the 1970’s and 1980’s , an increasingly clear trend toward greater income inequality emerged. By the end of the 1980’s, the top 20 percent of workers were receiving the largest share of income ever recorded by government figures, and the bottom three fifths were receiving the lowest shares ever recorded. This trend has continued into the 1990’s and currently shows no signs of decline. When the indicators of growing inequality were first observed in the 1970’s, some researchers argued that the effects were merely temporary artifacts of short-term labor market disturbances. The new occupational structure appears to be one with an increase of well-paid technical, scientific and professional jobs at the top, a sliding middle class, and a growing poorly-paid service and retail jobs at the bottom. Several important labor-force changes appeared to be contributing to the shifting occupational structure.
As occupational reconstructing and growing income inequality have become increasingly evident, a heated debate as to the causes and magnitude of these changes arose. Two dominant bodies of thought emerged around the issue: the job-skill mismatch thesis and the polarization thesis. Mismatch theorists argue that there is an increasing distance between the high skill requirements of post-industrial jobs and the inadequate training and mediocre qualifications of workers. They see the post-industrial economy leaving behind unskilled workers, especially women and minorities. For the mismatch theorist, the trend toward greater inequality is temporary arid will dissipate once the supply of workers acquires the skills demanded by a post-industrial economy. And they predict that the workers will experience an upgrading in their wages over the long run. Polarization theorists, on the other hand, believe that the rise in inequality is permanent, a result of the shift to a service-based economy. This vision of the postindustrial economy is characteristically polarized. The problem according to these theorists, is the type of jobs being generated in the new economy, not worker attributes. Because they believe the causes are structural and permanent, polarization theorists would deny the efficacy of public policies designed to educate and train unskilled workers. They predict a long-term continuation of the trend towards increasing income inequality.
Studies show that the long-run increase in income inequality is also related to changes in the Nation’s labor market and its household composition. The wage distribution has become considerably more unequal with more highly skilled, trained and educated workers at the top experiencing real wage gains and those at the bottom real wage losses. One factor is the shift in employment from those goods-producing industries that have disproportionately provided high-wage opportunities for low-skilled workers, towards services that disproportionately employ college graduates, and towards low-wage sectors such as retail trade. But within industry, shifts in labor demand away from less-educated workers are perhaps a more important explanation of eroding wages than the shift out of manufacturing.Also cited as putting downward pressure on the wages of less-educated workers are intensifying global competition and immigration, the decline of the proportion of workers belonging to unions, the decline in the real value of the minimum wage, the increasing need for computer skills, and the increasing use of temporary workers.

From the Paragraph 1, we can see that beginning in the 1970s（）

A:income became more unequal B:income became more equal C:income became more unstable D:income became more stable

Richard Holbrooke, who died at the age of 69 after suffering a ruptured aorta, was not the most universally beloved, but was certainly one of the ablest, ’the most admired and the most effective of American diplomats. He is one of the few of that profession in the past 40 years who can be compared with the giants of the "founding generation" of American hegemony, such as Dean Acheson and George Kennan.
Holbrooke was tough as well as exceptionally bright. He was a loyal, liberal Democrat, but also a patriot who was prepared to be ruthless in what he saw as his nation’s interest. To his friends, he was kind and charming, but he could be abrasive: no doubt that characteristic helped prevent him becoming Secretary of State on two occasions, under Bill Clinton and again when Barack Obama became president.
He held almost every other important job in the international service of the US. He was ambassador to the United Nations, where he dealt with the vexed problem of America’s debts to the organization, and to Germany. He was the only person in history to be assistant Secretary of State—the key level in routine diplomacy—in two regions of the world, Europe and Asia. He distinguished himself as an investment banker, a magazine editor, a charity executive and an author, but he will be remembered most of all for his success in negotiating an end to the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina at an Ohio airbase, and for his part in the American intervention in Kosovo. At the time of his death, he was Obama’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Holbrooke joined the Foreign Service, and in 1963 was sent as a civilian official to Vietnam, where he was one of a talented cohort of young men who were to become leaders in American diplomacy. Once back in Washington in 1966, Holbrooke worked for two years in the White House under Johnson, and then at the State Department, where he was a junior member of the delegation to the fruitless initial peace talks with North Vietnam in Paris.
By 1972, Holbrooke was ready for a change. He became the first editor of the magazine Foreign Policy, created as a less stuffy competitor to the august Foreign Affairs. He also worked for Newsweek magazine. In 1976, he went to work for Governor Jimmy Carter of Georgia, who was beginning his campaign for president and badly needed some foreign policy expertise. When Carter became president, in 1977, Holbrooke became his assistant Secretary of State for Asian affairs. (425 words)
According to the text, which of the following is true of Holbrooke

A:He presided over the fruitless initial peace talks with North Vietnam in Paris. B:He became the first editor of Foreign Affairs in 1972. C:He liked change. D:He became assistant Secretary of State for Asian affairs in 1977.

Passage Five
Hollywood (好莱坞) Is a suburb of the city of Los Angeles (洛杉矶) in California. Until 1908 it was no more than a quiet village on the northern side of the city, but in that year William Selig, one of the first people to make films, set up a film-producing workshop (车间) in Los Angeles. By 1911, David and William Horsely had set up another one in Hollywood, and at about the same time oil was discovered in the neighborhood. Thus Hollywood quickly became a big district given over to the film industry and to oil wells (没井).
The early makers of films found Hollywood a good place for their work because of its clear, sunny, rain-free weather, which allowed pictures to be taken all the year round. Also, it was known that every kind of scene needed for films, whether town, country, sea, desert or snow-capped mountains, could be found within the area of California. Today, when most films can be "shot" (拍摄) under cover by man made lighting, these advantages (优点) are not so important.
In spite of a drop in its importance, Hollywood remains a center of film production although now making more films for television than for the cinema.

At the beginning of this century, Hollywood （）.

A:was famous for its film industry B:became one of the biggest cities in California C:had only a small population D:became a suburb of Los Angeles

Passage Five
Hollywood (好莱坞) Is a suburb of the city of Los Angeles (洛杉矶) in California. Until 1908 it was no more than a quiet village on the northern side of the city, but in that year William Selig, one of the first people to make films, set up a film-producing workshop (车间) in Los Angeles. By 1911, David and William Horsely had set up another one in Hollywood, and at about the same time oil was discovered in the neighborhood. Thus Hollywood quickly became a big district given over to the film industry and to oil wells (没井).
The early makers of films found Hollywood a good place for their work because of its clear, sunny, rain-free weather, which allowed pictures to be taken all the year round. Also, it was known that every kind of scene needed for films, whether town, country, sea, desert or snow-capped mountains, could be found within the area of California. Today, when most films can be "shot" (拍摄) under cover by man made lighting, these advantages (优点) are not so important.
In spite of a drop in its importance, Hollywood remains a center of film production although now making more films for television than for the cinema.

At the beginning of this century, Hollywood （）

A:was famous for its film industry B:became one of the biggest cities in California C:had only a small population D:became a suburb of Los Angeles